EA Forums - Banner

Best wishes today for our American Tappers

Replies

  • California's total registered voters is actually about 18 million. And obviously that doesn't mean all 18 million voted. They'll release the final numbers soon, but voter turnout has been dropping in California for the past few elections.

    I take issue with what appears to be an assumption that the election result only affects the voting population. As someone who is not allowed to vote based on age, despite a keen interest in my country's political climate which is shared by a majority of my peers, it's a rather sensitive issue, which was brought to the forefront last June where the prospect of a hard border through the middle of my (wrongfully divided, in my opinion) country seemed a serious option, and border checks still seem to be a possibility. The result will affect all Californians, all Nebraskans, all Americans, and therefore the numbers should represent that, regardless of % voter registration.
  • The laws of impeachment would also need to be altered and impeachment doesn't necessarily mean removal from office. And setting up a government branch to appease the red states would fast track a civil war. Because if you never had a say in national elections but also had a special branch specializing in appeasing you, eventually you'd start to feel like a second class citizen. It's like here in California, a very large part of the state has no say in any elections because we're far outnumbered by the larger coastal cities. I've seen legislation passed that only had the support of four counties, while the other 54 voted no. And what's happen is that at first you just stop bothering to vote, it won't count anyway. That indifference then starts to turn into resentment, and resentment becomes anger. And now a growing population of inner California are starting to push for the entire state to be split into 2 or three states. Now picture that same scenario, but involving 70 million or more people in 30 states.
    Our founders knew that such a divide would tear this country apart. It nearly did once. Things didn't work out smoothly this time, but another election is guaranteed to happen four years from now. And the electoral-popular votes usually go to the same candidate. This is a moment of better luck next time, not I didn't get my way so tear it all down. Win some, lose some.
  • I understand that a Republican in California would feel pretty useless, given that the state is such a Blue stronghold. But, by the same token, do you not recognise the frustration 2.8 million Californians must be feeling because their voice was as equally disregarded? Because in the current system in use, the 30% majority Clinton had on Trump was irrelevant and their voices are ignored, a 2% lead would have had the same outcome. By not using the popular vote, they are, along with anyone else in a state that is heavily red or blue, unimportant.
  • There are so many solutions that don't involve an unfair system where some people are seen as more important than others depending on where they live. That is just silly. The idea of it tearing America apart or something is silly too because it is being torn apart right now. Making it so no person is seen as more important because of where they live is a step to making a fairer system.

    More people voted for Clinton, but Trump is in charge. That is wrong.

    Truly wrong. There is no excuse for that. Imagining civil wars and such doesn't change the fact that it isn't an acceptable reason why America can ignore the wishes of the people who voted. People voted, but the result disregards all these people.

    America often sees itself as being a lynchpin of democracy, yet it lags behind many countries because Americans often refuse to see that the Founders were not infallible people who had solutions that will always be the right ones, when in fact they were actually racist morons, quite frankly, and they had answers that may have worked more than 200 years ago, but don't work now. I didn't mean to generalise and I hope I haven't, but this seems to be a classic case of America believing itself to be unflawed when it lags behind lots of other countries- a larger issue, if you will. Places such as Britain mostly grew out of it. Perhaps America is just too young a country at the moment
  • I get that, but it doesn't always go that way, and you shouldn't disregard something that has mostly worked fine for over 200 years just because it occasionally doesn't go your way. Hillary lost states that Obama won easily. Like it or not the electoral system worked as designed. She didn't pay much attention to those states, and she lost those votes. 5 anomalies out of 58 elections is nothing to hit the panic button about. It sucks for her supporters, but since they live in Blue states they get their way on pretty much everything else. Sometimes you've gotta roll with the punches. And the next democrat candidate will learn from this and not ignore the 'flyover states' as dems like to call them.
    Actually we may never know the final true numbers, as most states don't count oversea absentee ballots unless the number of absentee ballots outnumber the difference in votes. Some states have mandatory counting of all ballots no matter what, but not all. And there's about 7 million absentee ballots this round. And those usually favor the republican by up to 70%. So in the end trump may have more votes, but they'll never be counted.
  • Nearly 10% of all elections going to the wrong candidate is nothing to worry about? :neutral:
  • ericborovay
    104 posts Member
    edited November 2016
    But its not the wrong candidate, if they didn't win more voters in the smaller states then its their own fault. Look at Hillary, she barely campaigned in some states because the assumption was they are blue, and have been for so long she can't lose them. She knows the electoral system, and she got arrogant. It cost her. She won twenty states, and in some cases not even the entire state, just the bigger cities, but the states winner takes all system gives her all the electoral votes of those states. To see what I mean look up election map by county. It shows mostly red, except around the large cities.

    I'd post a pic but I don't know how barely been on the forum since the change.
  • We appear to be going in circles here. I will amend my previous post to the "less popular" candidate but my point still stands.

    You say that the smaller states' votes aren't worth more, but then you point out that Hillary was flawed in not focusing her attention there, and that she needed their votes, despite her actually having the popular vote. Seems rather contradictory.

    Please do not mistake my issue with your country's electoral system as ignorance, I watched the results come in on early Wednesday morning (around 1-8am), and am aware of the high concentration of blue voters in cities. But I will vehemently insist my belief that just because they are in urban areas does not mean their vote should mean any more or less than those in rural areas.
  • Maybe not, but this only happens rarely. If we went by majority wins in a country as large as the U.S. Then this election would happen every single time. The candidate would only bother to campaign in the areas they already had support and ignore everywhere else that was deemed unlikey to vote for them. And they would win because of more people living their stronghold. And then as the founders worried, one party would get total power that never would change hands. And in time the marginalized states would get tired of it. I get that right now it sucks occasionally, but the alternative would mean permanent disenfranchisement of a large part of the country every single election. So the 'unfairness' of 10% of the time is actually better than being unfair 100%. Because we went down that road of a large part of the country being ignored for far too long, and it became bloody. Nobody wants a repeat. So we deal with an imperfect system, rather than face total implosion.
  • ericborovay
    104 posts Member
    edited November 2016
    And since there are uncounted overseas absentee ballots that will never be counted, nobody can say for certain that trump definitely lost the popular vote. That's millions of absentee ballots that usually favor the republicans by as much as 70%. So in the end he may have won the popular vote, but we'll never know.

    So how about the unfairness of our men and women in the military that may have tipped the popular vote back to trump, not having their votes tallied in the final popular count.
  • And since there are uncounted overseas absentee ballots that will never be counted, nobody can say for certain that trump definitely lost the popular vote. That's millions of absentee ballots that usually favor the republicans by as much as 70%. So in the end he may have won the popular vote, but we'll never know.

    So how about the unfairness of our men and women in the military that may have tipped the popular vote back to trump, not having their votes tallied in the final popular count.

    Nothing’s going to change the electoral math, but this idea about absentee ballots not being counted is just plain wrong. At some point the final popular vote totals will be known. As of 13 November Clinton was ahead by about 630K. Not that it’ll make any difference, but that margin will probably increase.
  • IckabodSchrek
    5919 posts Member
    edited November 2016
    rbl1sw.jpg.
    .....
    DeesToonTown in Crawl to the Finish #The Grumple Is Free!
  • That's millions of absentee ballots that usually favor the republicans by as much as 70%. So in the end he may have won the popular vote, but we'll never know.

    So how about the unfairness of our men and women in the military that may have tipped the popular vote back to trump, not having their votes tallied in the final popular count.
    If they're not counted then don't automatically assume they're Trump votes. Not counted is not counted. If what you're saying is true that would be ridiculous to not count them. I'm for all votes being counted regardless of perceived pointlessness.
    Here is my signature. Or maybe it's not.
  • IckabodSchrek
    5919 posts Member
    edited November 2016
    I agree with @simp7fan and @KrustyBrand that ALL the votes should be counted. Maybe this discussion, some of the hard feelings and some of the rioting wouldn't/shouldn't even be going on. Someone needs to finish their job. Now this is worth a letter to our congressional representatives.
    DeesToonTown in Crawl to the Finish #The Grumple Is Free!
  • I don't think these concession speeches should happen at 3am....based on the election being "called". Better to wait for the full tallies to be finished. I believe it's December 17 when the electors actually vote; when the real election takes place. Why not wait until then, at the most?
    Here is my signature. Or maybe it's not.
  • I agree with @simp7fan and @KrustyBrand that ALL the votes should be counted. Maybe this discussion, some of the hard feelings and some of the rioting wouldn't/shouldn't even be going on. Someone needs to finish their job. Now this is worth a letter to our congressional representatives.

    I see from Ickabod’s response that I was far less clear than I should have been in my previous post. When I said that “this idea about absentee ballots not being counted is just plain wrong”, I did not mean to say that they should be counted, but rather that they will be counted. According to the Federal Voting Assistance Program, “all ballots submitted according to State laws are counted in every election.”
  • simp7fan wrote: »
    I don't think these concession speeches should happen at 3am....based on the election being "called". Better to wait for the full tallies to be finished. I believe it's December 17 when the electors actually vote; when the real election takes place. Why not wait until then, at the most?

    Vote counting can drag on for days or even weeks after polling. It’s typically pointless to thumb twiddle when the outcome is clear based on the percentage of ballots counted and the margin of difference. Besides, concession speeches aren’t legally binding. Gore initially conceded, but later retracted that concession when it became clear that Florida’s electoral votes were still in play.
  • IckabodSchrek
    5919 posts Member
    edited November 2016
    Thanks for that info KB. Wouldn't it be nice if the media would tell everyone that, instead of getting everyone riled up about the popular vote being different from the electoral vote before the votes are even all counted? (Ya..like that will ever happen..where's the eye roll) But then they're the ones that are doing the early calls, like @simp7fan mentioned, often calling states wrong and sometimes the intire election. With the popularity of the live coverages, I don't see this ever changing.

    Also wondering if those absentee military ballots even fall under any state's laws that mandate them to be counted?
    DeesToonTown in Crawl to the Finish #The Grumple Is Free!
  • Also wondering if those absentee military ballots even fall under any state's laws that mandate them to be counted?

    Yes, they do. When procuring an absentee ballot, members of the military and overseas citizens necessarily specify their state of residence and the laws of that state apply.
  • I did not mean to say that they should be counted, but rather that they will be counted. According to the Federal Voting Assistance Program, “all ballots submitted according to State laws are counted in every election.”
    That's good to hear. I didn't know. I'm pretty sure my state counts them all but I wasn't sure about elsewhere.
    Besides, concession speeches aren’t legally binding. Gore initially conceded, but later retracted that concession when it became clear that Florida’s electoral votes were still in play.
    That took away some of Gore's political power. If he had waited, if it was normal to wait, then we'd probably all have been behind him instead of a lot of us freaking out that this could cause a delay in the next president taking office.
    Here is my signature. Or maybe it's not.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!